<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Art's $0.02:<br>
<br>
I've realized that all of ecological systems design can be boiled down
to one sentence:<br>
<i><br>
<br>
</i>
<div align="center"><i>"Do what makes sense in the context"</i><br>
</div>
<br>
<br>
Taking in the full sweep of this fascinating discussion, there are a
wide menu of possible solutions to the design question of how to
control indoor climate, ranging from "let go of the idea of control" to
passive, all natural materials solutions, to tight buildings with
mechanized ventilation, to the space station...and that's just along
the "level of technology" axis. <br>
<br>
Does anyone on this list actually think that any of these options
should just be struck from the list completely? From my view, nothing
mentioned was so wrong that it would not be optimal *somewhere,* and
nothing was so right that it could fully replace any of the other
options mentioned. <br>
<br>
While parts of the discussion sounded like this or that solution was
being questioned in absolute terms--"is this a valid approach?" I think
it might be helpful to explicitly frame this sort of discussion in
terms of improving our algorithms for matching solution with
context--"in what context is this approach indicated?" This was alluded
to by one poster who said that he sees people from one context
questioning a solution that's valid in another, but not so much in
theirs, without seeming to clearly grasp how different they might feel,
for instance, about tight houses if it were -50° outside. (There has
also been a wealth of useful detail-level stuff about things to think
about if you are going with this or that approach).<br>
<br>
There's an underlying tension in the world of building between the
"Uniform Building Code" idea--one generic approach that works
everywhere, and context-sensitive design. Even though I generally feel
that the "Uniformity" idea is a single bottom line approach that has
led to a world of problems, I see how it lives on inside me in the way
that I personally am unconsciously inclined to apply the systems that
I've evolved for my Santa Barbara context everywhere. The idea of tight
buildings makes me nervous but I think I could warm to it. The
electricity required for ventilation thing really creeps me out. It's
just so alien to my design mind, which has been shaped by my
environment...I'm grateful to John and others for helping me able to
imagine contexts in which this would, in fact, often be the best
solution. <br>
<br>
Yours, <br>
<br>
Art<br>
</body>
</html>